Carriers throughout Europe (but mainly French carriers) have sent information regarding their contracts with Apple to the European Commission saying that Apple's rules for carrying the iPhone are anticompetitive.

While Apple's terms are different from carrier to carrier, a major complaint from the European carriers is that Apple forces them to sell a certain amount of iPhones over a determined amount of time. If the carrier does not meet this quota, then they must pay Apple for the unsold devices.

The carriers say that this forces them to focus more on selling the iPhone each month than competing devices.

What does Apple have to say about this?

“Our contracts fully comply with local laws wherever we do business, including the E.U.," said Natalie Kerris, an Apple spokeswoman.

The European Commission hasn't opened a formal antitrust investigation yet because it hasn't received a formal complaint of anticompetitive practices. The Commission wants evidence that Apple's actions have hurt consumers and it wants to make sure that this is an issue it can solve.

However, the European Commission is monitoring the situation. It will have to speak to the carriers before launching a full investigation.

The carriers said they must agree to Apple's quota or they won't receive the iPhone at all. This is an issue, considering its one of the best-selling smartphones that customers regularly ask for. Having the iPhone draws many customers to carriers in the first place.

If Apple were to be subject to an investigation (and said to have been anticompetitive by the European Commission), the fine could be as high as 10 percent of the company's most recent annual sales worldwide.

This isn't Apple's first run-in with the European Commission. In December 2011, Apple and book publishers Penguin, Harper Collins (News Corp., USA), Simon & Schuster (CBS Corp., USA), Hachette Livre (Lagardère Publishing France) and Verlagsgruppe Georg von Holzbrinck (owner of inter alia Macmillan, Germany) were under the microscope when the EU found out about their selling practices. The EU saw this as anticompetitive against the likes of Amazon, and launched an investigation.

Apple and four of the publishers (all but Penguin) submitted a settlement proposal to the EU in August 2012, saying that the publishers will not restrict or limit an e-book sellers' ability to set, change or reduce e-book prices for two years. They also won't interfere with an e-book retailer's choice to offer discounts, and added the five-year suspension of the "most-favored nation" contract. The investigation was settled later in the year.

This is obviously a stupid case. Apple are not even close to being a monopoly. The carriers see their "fixed units" contracts are anti competitive not mentioning that they can get alternative contacts from any Android phone supplier. If this is costing them money, they can simply pass on the cost to the consumer and let them decide whether to buy iPhones or Android based on the given price.

This will never happen, of course, because competition exists. Which defeats the case right there... This isn't harming consumers, Google or the Android companies. It's not anti competitive. Onerous? Sure.

Did you read the article? To paraphrase what it said: Apple was contractually mandating that if retail outlets didn't sell a certain quota of iPhones they couldn't even get them. So what was/is happening is that they are "forced" to try and sell iPhones to the detriment of the sales of Android devices. THAT IS ANTI-COMPETITIVE. Though you obviously don't get it...

So let me get this straight - the *-*/-s*****g EU commissions of crimes think they are so special that they can "fine" 10% of annual WORLDWIDE SALES...

What ?!!?? WORLDWIDE SALES FOR A YEAR ?

Hey EU, you get to fine sales for the tiny complaining crap cuntry of the frenchie frogs, AND THAT'S IT JERKWADS !

You know, a bigger criminal hogging rip off artist going after a tiny in comparison company, claiming jurisdiction over their WORLD WIDE sales is really THE TOPIC OF THIS ARTICLE HERE AND NOW.

Wake up lame sheep ! I can't stand lying appleheads but let's face it the pig faced hog wild arrogant c0n artist robber baron sick as it gets totally out of control EU crapission with their masters of lining their own pockets fine needs to be taken down about 193,000 percent.

quote: You know, a bigger criminal hogging rip off artist going after a tiny in comparison company, claiming jurisdiction over their WORLD WIDE sales is really THE TOPIC OF THIS ARTICLE HERE AND NOW.

Wake up lame sheep ! I can't stand lying appleheads but let's face it the pig faced hog wild arrogant c0n artist robber baron sick as it gets totally out of control EU crapission with their masters of lining their own pockets fine needs to be taken down about 193,000 percent.

You should travel more, it calms the nerves and broadens the mind.

Europe in the spring can be nice, very few civilians armed with assault rifles, makes the place quite relaxing.

By the way where did you come up with the 193,000 percent figure? Would just 100,000 percent do?

Funny that there's still quite a bit of gun violence in Europe. Of course only the criminals have access to guns.

Additionally, out of all US gun violence cases, less than 2% had anything to do with so called "assault weapons". So banning them would result in an almost imperceptible decrease in gun violence.....always assuming that the lack of an assault weapon would immediately cause the potential attacker to instantly stop his actions and repent. Or more logically, they would just carry out the same crimes with non-assault weapons resulting in no change at all.

Forcing developers to sell via the Apple Store where Apple take a 30% cut including in app sales should be investigated. Without the Apple software tax I could potentially buy software for 30% less and have more choice. The hardware is overpriced to start with so overpaying for software as well is a joke.I’m an adult, I don’t need Apple to control what I can buy and charge me a 30% premium for the privilege of being treated like a child.The same goes for Windows RT and anybody else doing something similar. MS are stupid enough to think that they can do the same.

Not an Apple fan by any means, but you should be happy about Apple's app store and its effect on prices. Before iPhone, most mobile apps cost much more for the same functionality in the Windows Mobile world. Apple turned the mobile app game on its head, and many apps are actually underpriced now IMO.

I do think Apple takes too much of a cut. Combined with other indicators, such as Apple demanding a much lower price to stream music than their competitors, and it's apparent they really only care about themselves and their profits. Any positive effect for the consumer is incidental.

"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet. A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis